Political junkets shouldn’t be at taxpayer expense

On the morning of Aug. 30, as my family and I were leaving a hotel to visit the Minnesota State Fair, we came upon an army of Minneapolis police squadrons and officers, taking obvious positions in anticipation of Vice President Mike Pence’s visit to address the American Legion national convention at the Minneapolis Convention Center.

My son, age 14, was excited about the prospect of seeing the vice president’s motorcade and possibly the vice president himself. Helicopters hovered above and soon more marked and unmarked police cars and secret service personnel began appearing. After an hour of waiting, a flurry of official motor vehicles came flying by. More police cars, highway patrol cars, ambulances and limousines.

My son was certain that he saw a white-haired man wave to him inside of one of the limousines.

The following day the Star Tribune heralded Pence’s visit with a photo of the vice president and the outgoing commander of the American Legion, stating the Trump administration’s allegiance to veterans.Following his Legion stop, Pence addressed a Republican fundraising event in Bloomington, pledging to "turn Minnesota red.”

More security procedures and personnel, more caravans of police cars, ambulances and limousines.

More great expense – think millions of dollars — on the backs of the American taxpayers!

This was the third trip in as many months by President Trump or Pence to Minnesota in an effort to "turn Minnesota red." Three highly expensive forays to our great state to trump up support (pun intended) for a fledgling president who is desperate to hang on to Republican majorities in the U.S. Senate and House.

According to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, in August alone members of the Trump Cabinet and senior staff participated in more than 35 events affecting congressional districts across America.

A Sept. 5 news release by CREW staff stated that senior White House aides admitted that several official government events in which Trump, members of his cabinet and other administration officials participated are part of a coordinated effort to help Republican candidates in the coming midterm elections.

CREW Executive Director Noah Bookbinder said in the release: “The White House’s shocking admission that government officials are using purportedlyofficial events as coordinated political photo opportunitiesto boost partisan candidates takes the Trump Administration’s disdainfor the line between taxpayer-funded government work and politics to a new level.”

In seeking a thorough investigation, he added that “the White House must immediately halt the abuse of government resources for political gain and ensure that any improperly used taxpayer funds are appropriately reimbursed.”

Characterized as “mixed travel," there’s always a fine line designating “official” travel from “campaign” or personal travel, and the expenses associated with both.

Laws enacted under the Hatch Act prohibit federal executive branch employees, except the president and vice president, from undertaking any activity directed toward the success or failure of a political candidate or a political party in their official capacity, including official travel.

The law requires that costs for mixed travel be split between the government and the campaigns to ensure that taxpayer funds are not being used to support partisan politics.

As it is, however, no one is exactly sure of who’s footing these bills.

In his first full year in office, Trump’s travel expenses exceeded $13.5 million for 11 trips to his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, other Trump properties and golf clubs and campaign rallies. Each of his campaign trips cost approximately $1.5 million for the use of Air Force One and a cadre of accompanying airplanes, ground transportation vehicles, security personnel, lodging and pre-event preparations.

Indeed, Trump’s overall travel expenses are projected to surpass the costs of previous presidential travel during their entire terms in office.

To be fair, there has always been a fine line between sanctioned expense budgets for elected officials versus costs incurred for personal or political gain. A president can’t shun appropriate security measures every time he or she seeks a private or personal reprieve.

However, when their personal time is obviously spent campaigning, either for themselves or others whom they support, a clear distinction needs to be made and upheld.

If U.S. taxpayers are paying millions of dollars every time the president, vice president or their cohorts campaign to keep their jobs secure, or their followers intact, it casts notable dispersions on their credibility. It makes you wonder where their true intentions lie.

We must question the integrity of those politicians who campaign at taxpayer expense. Frequent visits to Minnesota to promote like-minded candidates in closely-contested congressional races, or pandering to veteran organizations, disguised as “official” business for the sake of political gain is unacceptable.

For a president who has built a reputation on lies, deceit and dishonesty, adding taxpayer campaign junkets to his growing list of unacceptable behavior shouldn’t bode well for his future, nor for those whom he supports.

This is the opinion of Paul Bugbee, a Central Minnesota resort owner. His column is published the third Thursday of the month.